So my son is ready to upgrade from his starter gun (Rem youth model in 7mm-08) to a new gun which will handle most of his hunting for many years to come. I'm trying to use the 'pay once, cry once ' philosophy.

He started with the manufacture. He has it narrowed down somewhat to three. Gun A (top contender) is offered in 6.5 creedmoor and 270. Gun B (next in line) is offered in 6.5 creedmoor and 7mm-08. Gun C (last choice) is offered in 6.5 creedmoor, 270 and 7mm-08.

The common theme here is the 6.5 creedmore. I have been handloading for the 270 and 7mm-08 for years. I have expensive dies and sizing mandrels and other equipment for those two calibers. I would have thought either of them would be the logical choice. But with the popularity of the 6.5 I am not so sure.

So enlighten me as to why the 6.5 is so popular and a better choice for him.

98% of his hunting with this gun will be PA whitetails with an occasional trip out west for antelope and mule deer. Maybe even an elk hunt one day.

Thanks

The Creed is a far better choice than the 243 for any big game hunting but it offers less than the 7-08 or the 270 when it comes to larger game like Elk. Adding that you already load for these two the choice would be easy for me.

Buy a high quality, adult-sized stock for the 7mm-08. Absolutely no need for a new rifle.

Different take: How about putting the 7mm-08 barreled action he already has into a top of the line stock appropriate to his now grown stature?

(Someone beat me to it. )

The Creeds are a flash in the pan.....The .270 will do any job you ask and more.....it'll be here far after most of us are long gone.....ammo can be purchased anywhere.....There is a reasom why it's so popular.....to me the choice is an easy one.

It might be a Savage,,,,,wouldn't hunt with an ugly gun one's entire life would yuu?

The 6.5 Creedmoor came out in 2007, and is now more popular than ever. Pretty long flash there.

He wrote Rem youth model, thankfully.

That would be my suggestion as well. I might make it a theme to upgrade the 700 on different occasions. A new stock and trigger might be nice rather than new gun. Later a longer mag box and new barrel-action job might be on the table. I would much rather have one really nice rifle than two cheaper ones.

As far as the caliber choices the 6.5 offers great ballistics but doesn't really excel until over 600 yards. The Creedmoor is popular because for the first time manufacturers combined a short action with a platform designed to shoot the high BC bullets. For many years anyone shooting 6.5's would have to change the barrel and modify magazine size from stock configurations to take advantage of the better BC bullets.

There's nothing wrong with a 270 but the 7-08 offers the benefits of a short action and a wider range of bullet choices. It's probably my favorite caliber and I can't think of anything it couldn't handle that a 270 could.

My apologies.....I need to do a better job of reading....in this case restocking with a HS precision or McMillan would be a good choice

Place a good bullet from any of the 3, and they work. For simplicity and factory ammo, if he will not handload, a 270 like the older parent 30 version, is never a bad choice.

The first rifle I wanted was a 270, but had to settle for a 7RM, later a 243, and so many since. I have used 3 270s to good effect. Never left me wanting....

Give me a 140 Accubond or 150 Partition and I will happily hunt anything in NA, non-dangerous. Same for a like-loaded Creemoor or 7/08

The 6.5 is popular for many reasons: Great accuracy, low cost quality ammo, light recoil, and deadly results, all in factory rifles.

Better? Subjective perhaps. Those qualities above might be better for some, for others, same-same. Relative to the shooter.

For a hunting rifle that will also be used on a lot of paper and steel, recoil will be a consideration, nod going to the 6.5

I'd consider the ammo question, will one handload or likely just buy factory. No doubt the 270 has the longest track record but I doubt the other 2 will ever be obsolete.

According to Nosler Load Data, the 7mm-08 will push a 140gr Ballistic Tip, Accubond or Partition to about 2950fps using Big Game. In factory loads, about 100fps slower.

The 6.5 Creedmoor will push the same weight bullets to about 2730fps handloaded with IMR 4350 - about 2710 in factory loads.

The Creed will launch a 120gr bullet to about 3,060fps, the 7mm-08 to 3,260 when handloaded. Similarly, about 100fps slower in factory guise.

If the 200fps speed advantage is important to you, choose the 7mm-08. If you think you'd like to load 175gr bullets for some reason, choose the 7mm-08. Otherwise, IMO, there is no practical difference. High-quality factory ammo with premium bullets are available just about anywhere for each.

I haven't shot a Creed, but I have shot a 6.5x55 and a 7mm-08, and to me, recoil is a wash - fit of the individual stock seems to makes more difference in perceived recoil than the choice of cartridge.

If he REALLY thinks he is going to be shooting to 600-700 yards or beyond, the 6.5 will give a slight advantage with higher BC bullets. But remember, to take advantage of the difference, he will have to train, not just do some casual shooting for fun. - and in that case, he'll probably end up wanting a dedicated long-range rifle and an appropriate scope.

If it were me, I'd buy a Tikka T3x stainless in 7mm-08, and keep the 700 as a backup or loaner, with a slip-on recoil pad for adult use.

Any of the three will work--but I'll just note that the 6.5 Creedmoor does NOT just have an advantage beyond 600 yards. High-BC 140-147's in the Creedmoor started at 2750 catch up to typical 140 softpoints started at 3000 in the .270 at 300 yards--and drift less in the wind at any range.

I've hunted a lot with various 6.5's including the Creedmoor, .260, 6.5x55 and 6.5-06, along with the 7mm-08 and 7x57 (which is the same thing as the 7-08 in a different-shape case) and the .270. Have yet to see any difference in how they kill big game, but do know the Creedmoor offers lighter recoil and less wind-drift.

That said, why change horses now? As prairie goat suggested, the present 7mm-08 in an adult stock would work very well.

vapodog,

Mathman already pointed out that the 6.5 Creedmoor has been a "flash in the pan" (of "the latest fad") for over a decade now. It's already chambered in the majority factory bolt-action rifles in the U.S. but in Europe, and starting to become one in Europe. More ammunition factories start producing it all the time: I just got a press release from Sig Sauer on their new 6.5 CM ammo.

I'm no longer surprised to read posts where older shooters claim the Creedmoor is just the latest fad, because I've also noticed a lot of older shooters are unaware of rifle history, whether relatively recent or decades ago. But somehow the "Creedmore" seems to result in more examples of aggressive ignorance, as a friend of mine so aptly puts it.

Along with ADD, ADHD, and PTSD we now have CBHS.

To everyone that suggested a new stock with the same action and barrel : Excellent idea and one that I did not think of. However, we (I must include myself) are excited about a new gun with new features and new possibilities.

I do not see him shooting 600 yards and beyond so there goes one of the advantages of of 6.5.

As far as handloading, he says he is interested and wants to learn. That could all change quickly so I'm thinking that the one with a lot of factory offerings would be the smarter choice. But I think that is a wash. I did not realize the 6.5 had so many factory offerings.

So you all confirmed what I thought all along. I will wait to see which rifle he chooses and pick one of those three calibers that is offered in that rifle.

Thank you

My family hunts with 7mm-08s. Deer and elk. All four are stainless Tikkas, two T3, 2 T3 Superlites. All four shoot the following loads sub MOA:

120 Ballistic Tip circa 3100 fps
140 Partition circa 2875 fps
150 ELDX circa 2790 fps

Four bulls so far, one antelope, a truckload of deer.




P

yeah, just change the stock and call it good...

why reinvest the wheel.

Just a wild thought...

Restock the 7mm-08, as suggested. Then use the money allocated to the new rifle to buy.... a new rifle. But choose a chambering that is different enough to expand the opportunities. Get a 243 for light game, or a Creedmoor or a 357 lever action just because they are a lot of fun.

I am 5'10" with long arms.
I have found that, for me, adult rifles are on the long side of perfect for hunting.
Shooting at targets, wearing normal clothes, they fee, great. Wearing heavy clothes,
shooting from odd positions, I like my stocks a little shorter.

We put a youth stock on a M7 for my daughter. Add a 1 1/2" thick recoil pad and it would be about right for me to hunt with.

If I had a 7-08 to hunt deer in Pa. I wouldn't bother with any of the cartridges you mention.

With all due respect Jphn,
1. This is not Europe....and lets pray that we never will be.....
2. While I do live way out in the "sticks"....you almost ,can't get here from there....I've yet to see any ammo of any kind marked "Creedmoor" anywhere I've been

that sad, I'll keep my eye open for it and if I see any in the ensuing weeks, I'll post a retraction.

A couple years ago I searched Denver for some.35 Whelen ammo to no avail.....My party had a spare gun so merely continued to our elk hunt in New Mexico. I shall always contend that having ammo is far more important than not having "better" ammo.

The advantages of high BC bullets kick in the instant the bullet exits the barrel, not the 600 yard mark. Velocity retention and less wind drift right from the get-go.

Advantages are insignificant at short range. As in, it don't matter none.




P

I'd run with this plan, but think really hard about adding a .223, perhaps with a matching action, or a fast twist to shoot heavies. He would get a lot more shooting practice that way.

Rebarrel it with a 24" barrel chambered in the 6.5x284. Set it up to shoot the 120NBT/125PT all in a nice "adult sized" stock. Get a Timney trigger and a mid size scope. He will be set for about anything, still have the wind bucking ability of 6.5 cal and get him started in handloading. He will love it! OR...do the same thing "but in 7mm/08 Ackley Improved" and really open up his world!

vapodog,

I live out in the sticks, and the only "sporting goods" store in town (actually a gas station/ranch-supply store) has a good-sized stack of 6.5 Creedmoor ammo. The four sporting goods stores in the local "big" town (all of 25,000 people and an hour's drive away) have several brands of Creedmoor ammo.

Did my including European rifles in the list of companies chambering the Creedmoor (and producing ammo) make you think it STARTED in Europe? If so, no the cartridge did not originate there. It was designed and produced by Hornady, and first chambered in actual American-made rifles--and became popular over past decade (not a flash-in-the-pan) in the good old U.S.A. European companies have been starting to chamber it in the past few years partly because the U.S. is the largest market for sporting rifles and ammo in the world, but it is also becoming popular among European shooters.

I don't really care if you "retract" your opinion about the 6.5 Creedmoor. If you base your opinion of a cartridge on such limited criteria then your opinion is irrelevant.

Another great alternative. Different enough from the 7mm-08 to open up some interesting opportunities.

How about letting your son read a couple of loading manuals and books and giving him the choice? Let him choose his own rifle and cartridge. As already mentioned, all three cartridges will be fine so he can't make a bad choice. He might even come up with something else.

That would be my option, too.

1:8" twist .223 would give him everything from small game to Whitetail/Pronghorn if he so desired as well as some great varmint hunting and out around 600yd target shooting if he were to have a sporter length barrel.

Ed

at our rifle shoots some of the guys do very well with the 6.5 creedmoor, i still just use a 6 BR and can hang with them,as can a 7mm -08, generally the best shooter wins with a 6.5x 47. I ordered a 6.5 creedmoor for my gun business to sell,some will think I am foolish but i will see how it sell`s, but I wish Browning made a 6.5 creedmoor in a BLR that would be a fun lever rifle maybe to own ? Like it not the 6.5 creedmoor is here to stay for a long time.

I'm a 270 guy. That being said I'd go with some sort of 7-08. Change his stock, as some have said or whole new gun. Since you hand load for it already it seems a no brainer to me to go that route. The cartridge itself is a very good one also. Great ballistics.You give up very little to the 270 and may be able to find ammo in a pinch easier than the 6.5 if need be. The 7-08 will be my son's first rifle. Cheers.

Pharmseller,

On the other hand, there are no disadvantages to using the 6.5 Creedmoor at close ranges.

If I had a son who expressed continued interest in hunting and who wanted a new rifle, I would get the kid what he wanted, within reason. Let him choose. If he's old enough to decide to kill something, he's old enough to decide what to kill it with. And the deciding, as we know, is a lot of the fun.

I switched to the 7mm-08 for new shooters, both young and adult, about twenty years ago. It is a cartridge that is very easy to load for and that we have used successfully on game ranging from coyotes to elk. There are no flies on the 6.5 Creedmoor, but for new shooters I prefer the 7mm-08. YMMV.

The cool thing about keeping the old rifle and changing parts out is that it is “customized” and special, not another off the shelf rifle that everyone else owns.

A Mcmillan swirly or Edge stock, money put into a quality scope, eventually a new barrel (whether in the same chambering or perhaps rebarreled to a 6.5 Creedmoor). A personalized rifle, all with the soul of the rifle (the action) still there to maintain the memory of all the days in the hills and dead animals it has helped the son take to the ground.

My first rifle was a mouser 98 8mm. Dad rebarreled to 6mm cause varmints is what I mostly shot. Deer wasn’t commonly seen then.

I think that what you’re hunting might be a big consideration. Also, what ranges your son will be shooting. You say mostly deer and then possibly elk and antelope... I’ve hunted antelope with 7x57 and 270 both work fine. The 6.5 would too I suspect.

For elk I’d go with the 270 and 150 grain Partitions. But a 7mm with 150 PT’s would work too. The modified Savage case with a 6.5 bullet in it would probably work too - I think that’d be third choice though.

To me those options you mentioned here on the fire is similar to starting a discussion on what pickup is best while you and your co-workers just had a few at the bar.

I don’t care for short actions that much because of the inability of adjusting seating depth. But then the 300 Savage case length cartridges sort of bypass that issue.

I’m not one to fiddle with scope adjustments when out game hunting, maybe PD shooting though. That makes a difference to me. Shooting game at distance is not for me either. Actually, I look down upon that.

I have a couple 270’s and I do not find them wanting for any thing I’ve taken them out to do. I bought my wife a 7mm-08 and I have a 7x57 (similar). No issues with that cartridge either. The only 6.5 I’ve ever had was 50 years ago and bullets were slim pickings then.

Another part of the equation is money. Buying a stock for your Remington makes financial sense.

But whether you go with “A”, “B”, or “C”, I think you’ll by happy with your choice. Heck, if you go out west to shoot elk, you might want to buy a rifle just for that.

But I’ll have to add any cartridge that less than 100 or at least 75 years old is a “flash in the pan”.

I never thought I’d have AI cartridges and now I do. As soon as I run out of options, I still don’t have a 348, 358 Norma or a 38-55 or a.... maybe I’ll have a another flash in the pan like that 6mm Remington.

Don't know if any one thought of it, but I don't think the PGC will let anyone use a 6.5 mm anything on elk in PA. If I remember correctly, must use a 270 or larger.
Suggest keeping that thought in mind when choosing.

The reason the Creedmoor is so popular is it does so many things so well... were I starting my kids out today they’d be equipped with rifles so-chambered.

Positives:

Extremely accurate, affordable ammunition available everywhere and is loaded to the gills.
(270 ammunition - and even some 7-08 ammo - is incredibly anemic).

Makes best use of the commonly used 2.8” SA magazine.

Twisted correctly from the factory.

Recoil is minimal.

Varmints to elk capability.


Negatives:

Cranky old dudes don’t like it.
Cranky old dudes can’t spell it.

You would still be a apologetic kcunt no matter what rifle you and your kids shoot.

I normally don’t engage with passive-aggressive sociopath’s, but in this instance I’ll make an exception... about a year ago, unsolicited by me, you apparently felt the need to unburden your soul and sent me a PM explaining that, in so many words, you’re essentially a complete dick.

I’ve decided you’re correct.

Brad,

A lot of cranky old dudes also can't spell it.

I agree with you and half the other guys that suggested upgrading the stock.

Yes, but you could easy spend two lifetimes trying to get an elk tag.
I would worry about that bridge if you ever see it.

hell the walmarts here carry the creedmoor ammo. if walmarts has it, everyone has it

John, so true... I fixed it

Bingo

Man I'd be willing to be against that statement as big as Denver is, you'd have had to had 35 whelen somewhere. Of course as liberal and anti gun as CO is lately, it could be true.

I know in a town of less than 4000 as a youth, we had 35 whelen ammo on the shelf of 2 gun stores.

And we'd have sure had the creedmoor ammo if it had been around as popular as it is.

Some folks have been known to target shoot 223s to 1000 and remain supersonic with a 20 inch barrel. FWIW. LOL

A of old cranky dudes don’t want to spell it.

That's right, they'd rather assume they know all about it, without ever having shot it, or seen it shot....

It's here to stay....trust me.

And I don't even own one.....

In America, the adage, bigger is better, is deeply ingrained.

That said, lest I remind folks, Alan on the fire, dumped his elk at just shy of 1,000 yds, using a 6.5x47 Lapua.......

Shot placement with proper bullets thru vitals ends the discussion every time. Re: the BR and 47 comments above, those two have been the most enjoyed rounds of all I have shot in my lifetime, superbly accurate, and light recoil and blast. They kill with no fuss. And most would say those rounds are a smidge BEHIND the CM

Like most of the folks who have responded to the OP's questions, I would go with the 7mm-08 first and a .270 second. I would replace the stock of the 7mm-08 with a MacMillan, but one with the correct LOP.

Does it mean that there aren't "super accurate" .270's and .7mm-08 rifles?

I understand that gun makers must find the way to sell guns, and that specially some gun writers push the new guns, but in reality there are all kinds of .6.5's (.264's) that are just as accurate. Some even launch their bullets at the same speeds as the now "super accurate" 6.5.

https://skyaboveus.com/hunting-shooting/65mm-Cartridge-Virtual-Shootout-Which-is-Best

Let him pick, there are no wrong choices. If he likes his current rifle, get him an adult stock that fits. Take the extra money and buy reloading components. Let him shoot the barrel out practicing. Then rebarrel it.

If he shoots the gun enough to warrant a new barrel, everything he hunts with it will be in serious trouble for the rest of his hunting days.

I don't shoot enough(or far enough) to bother making the switch from a couple 270's to 6.5's.


Brad mentioned starting his kids on the 6.5, hell if I was starting over I'd start myself on one.

Good points PG.

OP - I'd take a 700 in a really nice stock over any factory budget to midrange rifle. Not sure what you had in mind, maybe a custom? Still, I'd restock, but if the kid has his heart set on something, I'd listen.

That may very well be true, but the few advantages are wasted on the majority of people that don’t need or couldn’t use that advantage.

While that is actually correct as stated, it's somewhat disingenuous & not exactly apples to apples, in making a comparison with a High-BC 140-147 in the Creedmoor to a 140 softpoint in the 270.

But using a 143 Hornady ELD-X in the Creed & a 145 Hornady ELD-X in the 270 at your stated velocities, & a 200 yd zero, JBM shows less drop for the 270 at 1,000 & a whopping 0.4 MOA more windrift in a 10 MPH, 90* wind than the Creed.

And the 270's velocity is still higher at the 1,000 yard mark.

Or run the 150 Nosler LRAB at 2950 in the 270 & the results are still the same.

The Creed is a nice round & I like it & it has a lot of pluses in it's favor, but given better bullets in the 270, there's just no real performance difference from a ballistics standpoint according to the ballistic gack data that I see when making a fair comparison.

MM

I have a .270 Winchester featherweight that I put together from used parts I scrounged up on the internet....it has turned several dime sized groups using Swift A-Frames 130 grain. (yes...three shot groups)

If one is a benchrest shooter, this don't cut it at all....but for a simple old hunter.....it's pretty darn good.

You are ashamed of being a hunter and a man your girlish opinions are just that. LOL. Some day when I kill a lion I’m posting it like you made. me pull the trigger just to make your ass tighten.
Your boyfriend can thank me I’m sure!!
GFY.

PS the pm was so you could read what a man respondeds with when pissyyy like your self slander others for posting pictures of successful hunts. IE. elk mans loin.
Psss you are a [bleep]. LOL.

I’m disappointed that, in what’s already turned into a three page pissing match, none of you took the time to jump on rickt300 for bringing up the 243.

I jumped on the 6.5 Creedmoor bandwagon last year. Bought a cheap Howa, loaded up some ammo, and shot some of the best groups I've ever fired. I also had a 7-08 and a 270, but I wanted to see what the 6.5 CM was about. No doubt it's here to stay, because it's a good accurate cartridge. But at the normal hunting ranges that 95% of us will shoot at game at, there will no difference between any of those 3, just as long as the shooter does their job correctly.

Still, I don't plan on getting rid of mine, and may even buy another one. It's too good to ignore. But, on the other hand, so are the 7-08 and the 270. Pick any one of those 3, and you can't go wrong.

vapodog, I have a Savage American Classic and its not too ugly. but it ain't pretty either

Of the three the 7mm 08 loaded with a 168 Berger should do better than the 6.5 CM with 140's in the wind and energy past 600 yards, this is a no brainer

My personal experience with Savage has been horrendously poor.....but that was a very long time ago. Since then Savage has come out with the accutrigger.....proof that they are very interested in improving their product....it's a splendid innovation and now copied by several arms MFRs!.

While a lot of old time manufacturers have folded up, they have kept the doors open.....accuracy has been a high point with Savage for a long time.....seems that take precedence with a lot of shooters.....even the model 99 I had years back was an excellent firearm in the accuracy department. However as the trend of buyers turned to the bolt action guns, Savage seemed to be much more into price points and retaining their accuracy values.....all other features like feeding, extraction, ejection, etc be damned. Yes, they don't have the style and flair that the Winchester M-70 gave us......but they were cheap.....and that seemed to be the Trump card.....looks be damned!

Had they found solutions to their function issues, maintained their accuracy issues, their appearance might command a different view point. That said they ignored their product....their customer didn't seem to care as long as they were cheap.

Today's Savage might just be the finest of the bunch.....but I wouldn't know as I haven't bought one in 30+ years....so in my eyes, the UGLY continues.

“Sweet lips, I drew a Pa Elk tag!!!!” “Great what rifle you plan on using.” “ I’m thinking Great Grandpa’s .270. He would have liked that, after all the years he and Granddad put in.”

So, that's your excuse to dislike it?

One of the advantages that will be used by the masses is a reduction of recoil for similar performance of larger rounds.

Anytime folks drop down in recoil, especially if they are dropping down from something like 7mm Mag recoil to 6.5 Creedmoor recoil, those folks are going to shoot better.

As soon as an American manufacturer chambers the 6.5 Creedmoor in a rifle as svelte as an M700, with the M70 open trigger, a bolt handle that doesn't break off, sub minute of angle at 100 meters for 5 shots of course, with flawless ejection, fully scoped and loaded and slinged under 8 lb, factory stocked nice enough to not need a McSwirly, for a selling price of less than $699, I will buy it. Until then i guess i will just have to keep shooting my M700 in 280 Remington and hope the trigger doesnt fail me and the handle doesn't break off and no one makes fun of me for not having a 270 or a 7mm08 or a 6.5 Creedmoor.

Good luck with your decision!

We'll let the 270 shooters jump on him....

Your post is way too logical. You are going to piss someone off... Just not sure who it will be though...

Restock the 7mm-08

Save some nickels and snag a Barrett Fieldcraft in 6 Creedmoor.

Our local Farm and Fleet has been a 30-30, 30-06, and 270 mecca for 50 years. along the way they started stocking the .308, .243, 22-250 and the .223.

I tried for years to get them to stock some 7-08 and some 25-06. No dice...

They now have a half shelf of 6.5 CM offerings.

Still no 25-06.

I start over all the time! Come on in Sam, the water is fine!

I switch up almost yearly. Partly because I get bored and partly because I like seeing how different bullets from different cartridges perform.

Just so happens, the three cartridges in question are my current favorites. They’re all perfect whitetail cartridges. They’re good for other stuff too.

Nor do I.

Yet...

Since I have a 6mm Rem and 6.5X55 and BETTER cartridges....
what’s to gain in a ‘Creedmoor’ ? ( I can spell it )




Jerry



just yanking a chain.

MontanaMan,

You're right, my comparison of a high-BC 140 in the 6.5 Creedmoor and a typical softpoint in the .270 was disingenuous. I made because that's the typical comparison made by anti-Creedmoor guys, who only look at muzzle velocity--but should have mentioned the reason for my comparison

Let's make another comparison, using anoth pair of 140-grain bullets of the same brand and model, this time "mid-BC" bullets of tougher construction, so they'll penetrate reliably both at close and longer ranges--140-grain Nosler AccuBonds, again at 2750 in the 6.5 and 3000 in the .270. Let's also limit the range to 500 yards, still farther than most hunters shoot.

The .270 bullet will shoot flatter than the Creedmoor's, dropping 10" less at 500. So what? Most people who shoot that far dial-in elevation.

At 500 the .270 bullet will be traveling less than 100 fps faster, instead of the 250 fps at the muzzle. For those who firmly believe in kinetic energy, at 500 the .270 bullet will carry about 100 more foot-pounds--2/3 as much as a 40-grain high-velocity .22 Long Rifle at the muzzle.I sincerely doubt that would make any difference when hitting the ribs of a deer or elk.

At 300 yards (the maximum range for many, if not most hunters) the .270 will shot 2 inches flatter. I doubt like hell that the average hunter can hold within 2 inches at 300 yards.

At ANY range wind-drift will be just about the same, so there's no advantage or disadvantage there.

The big difference, as prairie goat pointed out in his recent post, is in recoil. The 6.5 Creedmoor kicks about 2/3 as much as the .270. Of course, some people would say the .270 doesn't kick much, but as PG also pointed out, if you're going to practice much with your big game rifles, it does make a difference.

I once spent what was an essentially an 8-hour work day, minus an hour lunch break, shooting a 6.5 Creedmoor with 140-grain AccuBond factory ammo out to 1000 yards, though most of the shooting took place from 300-700. Don't remember exactly how many rounds were fired, but it was well over 100, and probably over 150. I would NOT want to do that with my Winchester Featherweight Model 70 .270.

I also know, from actual field experience, that the 6.5 Creedmoor will kill big game just as well as a .270, whether deer or elk. I also know a 140 AccuBond from a Creedmoor will exit the chest of a 6-point bull elk at 40 yards, because that's what one of my hunting partners used last fall on a hunt here in Montana--and the elk dropped in less than 50 yards.

I am not a 6.5 Creedmoor addict, though I do own one (my third since 2010), in part because so many hunters want to know about it this days, including handloading data with the latest powders and bullets. But I also own and hunt with a .260 Remington, 6.5x55 and .270--along with a bunch of other rifles. If I decide to take a 6.5 hunting in the local mountains, it would more likely be a Tikka T3 Superlite .260 Remington, because it's consierably lighter than my Ruger American Predator in 6.5 Creedmoor. On more level ground I might just take my custom FN Mauser in 6.5x55, with a hand-made walnut stock, Lilja barrel and Leupold 3.5-10x fitted with Darrell Holland's ART reticle. Or my Sauer drilling, made in the 1950's, which like the others has a 1-8 twist rifling twist, but also has two 16-gauge barrels in case I run into pheasants, Huns or grouse.

Or just for the hell of it, I might take my .270--or my NULA .30-06, Barrett Field Craft .243, or grandmother's 722 Remington .257 Roberts. With me, you never know, because both as a journalist and rifle loony I try to be "fair and balanced" to all rifles--unlike those who hate the 6.5 Creedmoor even though they've never shot one.

Say’s the guy who runs one of the largest gun shops in the country...

As many have said I would restock and use the savings for another rifle. A 7mm08 can cover about anything in North America although it would be a little light for the biggest critters. Getting a 22-24cal would cover the light end better and more economically and gives you a reason to get rifle #2.

Who wants to bet Dogger has a Leupold on his 280..

Geez, I kind of want to go out and buy a 6.5 CM after reading this thread. But I do wonder how it would compare to my 270 Win. with 140 Accubonds at 3100 fps? Obviously recoil would be much less with the 6.5, but when hunting I normally only need to shoot one time. Without running the numbers I'm pretty sure my 270 will do better in the wind.

CBHS

JB,

Yep............you covered it all very well.

For the most part, for most people, for most ranges & applications, it's all kind of a moot point & just something to BS about.

And of course, you are on the mark about recoil...........even though the 270 isn't a "hard kicker" by any means, it's surely more that the 6.5, or the 7-08 for that matter too, especially with stiff 150 gr. loads.

I was just kinda pokin' you a bit & your response was a great explanation of the real world for most folks except the die-hard's in either case who always know more than they understand.

In most arguments, one can always find "facts" or "data" on either side to support one's view.

Thanks for taking the time to compose an excellent response.

MM

MontanaMan,

Thanks for your thoughtful response.

Forgot to mention that I've also owned several 7mm-08's and 7x57's (including my present pair), and have hunted with them a lot too, taking game up to elk, moose, wildebeest and kudu. Which is why my original post on this thread also suggested buying a new stock for the 7mm-08....

The 6.5 does everything the 7-08 and 270 does with recoil closer to 243. But then the recoil from 7-08 or 270 is hardly bad. You could certainly do the job with any of them, but if looking for an excuse to buy something different the 6.5 has a lot going for it. It is already far more common than 7-08 and in a few more years may well surpass 308. It ain't a flash in the pan.

Dogger,

My first 6.5 Creedmoor was a Ruger Hawkeye with a decent piece of walnut, purchased for just about that price at Capital Sports & Western Wear in 2010. It had an open trigger (which I've found to be more easily "adjustable" than the Model 70's), and with scope weighed less than 8 pounds, even though it had a 26-inch barrels. I also purchased a couple boxes of factory ammo, and after getting the rifle on paper at 100 yards, its first 5-shot group went into right around .6 inch.

Unfortunately, the standard, walnut-stocked Hawkeye is no longer chambered in 6.5 Creedmoor, probably because far more shooters purchased other variations of Hawkeyes (and RAR's and RPR's) when they wanted a Creedmoor. But the real-world price hasn't gone up much, if at all, and this year they started chambering it in .260 Remington! (Which some Creedmoor haters will no doubt regard as a Sign From The Heavens.)

As much as I like the 260, if GOD is sending signs, I'd opt for World Peace over Ruger cataloging 260s again. BTW, the only 260 that I could find listed on the Ruger site is the limited edition stainless RSI they made for Lipsey's.

And those who love it even though they've never shot one.

Jeff,

I recently found the Hawkeye .260 on the Ruger site in the "standard" Hawkeye section, with an 18.5" barrel.

Yep, for the last few years, the gun I've most hunted with has been an original Rem 700 Ti in 7-08, mostly using the 120 NBT or 120 TSX.............I like both the light weight for carrying, the 22" barrel & the light recoil, it's extremely accurate (after some work) & it kills what I've shot with it just fine.

I only own 2 magnum rifles anymore after having a schittload of them at one time, & those 2 are a 338 & 416 for specific purposes.

MM

I agree with this.

Originally I had it in my head the OP had a Model 7 Youth, with the skinny barrel and crappy M7 stock (if there is a worse rifle to start young people out with, I can't imagine it would be much different than that).

However, I realized it's the SPS Youth model with the excellent 20" Remington no.2 type contour. Heck yeah, re-stock it.

And if you want more barrel length, find a Rem take-off barrel and screw it on. In fact, if you want to be really exotic, locate one in 308

All three rounds are going to be equally effective as a generic deer rifle. From a purely practical point of view, 7-08 makes perfect sense as you're already setup to load the round and are familiar with it.

But, there's something to be said for getting a new chambering and starting from scratch working up loads, especially going through the process with your son so that he can have that experience. So I'd say the 6.5 creedmoor deserves consideration.

Love it.

Sounds like we've gone through a somewhat similar transformation. While I still have several rifles chambered for magnums and medium-bores from .30 caliber to .416, they're mostly kept around for test purposes, since I haven't hunted with any of them since 2011. The "big" rifle I've hunted with since then is a 26 Nosler, and it hasn't gone hunting nearly as much as several other rifles chambered for smaller rounds.

Actually, I learned a lot from you..............started reading you when you first started doing the back inside cover of Rifle; I think it was called Woodsmoke & Rifles or something similar.

Laughin' here............that was a while ago.

MM

I have a Remington 700 Classic in 270, not a real lightweight rifle, but not a heavy one either. Shooting 130 grain bullets with 60 grains of H-4831, I'd be lying if I said I didn't start to notice the recoil after a few shots. It's not bothersome, but I have arthritis in my shoulders, and it is noticeable. I have a Howa 6.5 Creedmoor, a little heavier rifle than the Remington, but not by much. The Howa is much more pleasant to shoot, practically recoil free. It will also kill a deer just as dead as the 270 will.

I have all three, the Creedmoor has less recoil. My 100 lb granddaughter has shot them all. Someone so small can probably feel recoil better. She loves the 6.5 Creedmoor. She will tell you right quick the Creedmoor has less recoil. It’s fun to shoot.

Ha, my M700 280 is scoped with a 3-9x40 Conquest. i must admit though, that i have a Leupold 2-7x33 on my Ruger M77 6mm Remington, which God forbid, is a push feed even though it fools many thinking it is CRF.

For more years than i can count i have considered the 140 Partition handloaded to an honest 2700 fps in a 6.5 all I need for anything i might hunt. I could be happy with a walnut stocked Ruger Hawkeye in 260 Remington, 6.5 Creedmoor, 6.5 Swede, or 6.5x284 if I could just find one... and horrors,,, would probably scope it with a 2-7x33... but then i would be thinking about that honest 2700 fps with a 140 partition... if it fell short of 2700 fps i would be disappointed, even though i know a few fps mean nothing. But certain performance metrics must be met.

if I were the OP I would be tempted to roll with the future and the 6.5 Creedmoor... but no one loads the 140 NP for it that i am aware of...

Nosler loads the 140 AccuBond in their factory 6.5 Creedmoor ammo, which is basically the same thing.

The only justification for switching from a 7mm 08, which is one of the best rounds ever [re]invented, is novelty, since you reload.
And there's not a damn thing wrong with novelty. Nobody ever forgets a new rifle from Dad. Truly a no-loose scenario, and you are a fortunate man.

Where novelty to move me, and it already has because I own all these rifles owing to a recent 6.5 Creed, it would not move me to a long action cartridge, unless owing to Jack O'finity.

I typed "260" in the "select a caliber" box in the firearm search page and the only 260 that came up was the Lipsey's RSI. Ruger is no longer listing the rifle that you found on their site. Or, if they are, I wan't able to find it.

Dislike, maybe, but certainly enough to not jump into that ring.

Jeff,

Go to Ruger's site, click on rifles, then on Hawkeye rifles, then on standard Hawkeye. The .260 is listed right at the bottom of the cartridge list, with a red flag saying "NEW." I just looked at it again. It's 18.5" barreled, Mannlicher-stocked, a Lipsey's special.

Tag

Despite my enjoyment of mannlicher stocked rifles, since I already have 25 260s, including a 77 RSI, a tang safety unit that has been rebored from 243, I'm probably among the least likely guy to buy the Lipsey's special, no matter how special they are.

several Ruger M77 Africans in 6.5x55 on GB. Now that has me thinking about time to swing for a 6.5!!

I own all three also and that is why I stated there were no bad choices. I am an unabashed 270 guy having owned dozens, and messed with bullets from 85gr all the up to 180gr. My go to hunting cartridge.

I own a couple 7mm-08's but have never hunted with them, but have friends that use them all the time. I consider it a 270 short, and that places it in pretty good company.
Many antelope, deer, and a couple of elk have been put in the freezer on our hunting excursions.

I own a Bergara HMR 6.5 Creedmoor, that when suppressed, the recoil is nonexistant. I just recently bought another Creedmoor, a Remington 700 SPS, that is currently getting 6" of the barrel trimmed off and threaded for a suppressor. This is going to be my dedicated subsonic hunting rifle. Hoping to use 140gr Hornady IL's as the online calculators show this bullet is easily stabilized in a 1:8 twist at subsonic velocities.

How is a 140 Interlock moving that slow going to perform on game?

Thanks for all the replies.

Let me address the restocking the original gun idea first.

It is a good idea but when we sat down to discuss what options he wanted on the new gun, I felt that going with a new gun was the better option. Some of those features were a 6 1/2 lb (or less) gun with cerakote finish, a quality trigger and stock, and the remington style safety. All his choices. So his original gun would need a new stock, new trigger, and cerakote and I would not know the weight of the finished product. Plus, how cool would it be if some day his children would be interested in hunting and he could start them off with the same gun he started with?

He has a Tikka Lite in 22-250 so another gun in 223 or similar caliber would not be necessary.

As many have stated (and what I suspected all along) any one of the three will work for his needs and we will let whatever gun he picks help decide what caliber.

Thanks

I will find out. I used 277 caliber 140gr BTSP down to 1800fps with no issues and good expansion. Have also used 277 85gr TSX at 1900 fps with no expansion issues.

I could go with a softer bullet, like the SST but would have drop down in weight for length considerations for stabilization.

While I haven't used that particular bullet, IME standard big game bullets perform really poorly at subsonic speeds. Plus they are going to ricochet like crazy.

Something like a Lehigh Defense Controlled Fracturing bullet is a better choice, but I don't think they make a 6.5.

Good reason to stay with 30 caliber for subsonic use - 30 caliber has options designed for subsonic speeds.

Another choice is a wide meplat cast bullet, or handgun bullet designed to expand at subsonic speed. Which is one reason to go with 35 caliber for subsonic rifle use - lots of readily available handgun bullets or molds to make them.

Seems like he wants a bunch of custom options, so customizing his original gun seems like the best choice, since he's just going to customize some other gun to get what he wants anyway. A new Timney trigger for a Remington is ~$130, or a well adjusted factory trigger works just as well. A Mcmillan Edge is around 600. Cerakote is garbage, so buy a couple cans of spray paint and you'll get the same result. The rifle with a 24 ounce Mcmillan Edge will make the 6 1/2 lb goal. As far as the possibility of having future grandkids to start out, simply bolt the rifle back into the original youth stock.

If simply looking for a new rifle, buy a Barrett Fieldcraft and "fuggetaboutit", as the NYC boys say.

Billy,

Sort of off-track, but Cerakote can be anything from really good to really bad. It depends on the percentage of silica, the ceramic component in the finish. I have rifles that were Cerakoted over a decade ago, and have been hunted a lot with hardly any wear on the coating. The one I've hunted with the most does have some very light wear on the corners of the muzzle, about like you'd see from blueing after a few hunting seasons, but that's it.

The Fieldcraft is one of the rifles that is getting serious consideration: all though it is in third place due to the lack of a hinged floorplate.

I can't fathom going to the super-light Fieldcraft (or Montana) as an all-around rifle. They aren't. The LA Fieldcraft might qualify, but not the SA version with its little no.1 contour.

Get something made/bought that finishes all-up (scope, sling, rounds) in the 7.25-7.5lb range with a barrel that finishes no less than .600" at the muzzle and you'll really have a lifetime, general purpose rifle.

John,
I've had really poor luck with Cerakote. I've had three rifles with the finish, two of which were done by smiths with good reputations for Cerakoting - not sure on the other one, as it was purchased coated. All three scratched within the first day or two of use. Walt Birdsong's finish has held up better for me, performing more like your Cerakoted rifles.



Brad,
A long action Fieldcraft with a scope that holds up (like an SWFA 3-9 or Nightforce SHV 3-10) is going to be in that weight range, all-up with a full magazine and sling. I don't like the #1 contour on the short action Fieldcrafts either, though the 18" threaded version is really nice once a lightweight suppressor is added.

Understood Billy, that's why I said it "might" qualify... the LA Fieldcraft is a fine rifle with its no.2 contour. In a 270 I don't think it can be beat, but I'd cut it to 22 or 23".

But, though the OP didn't mention it, the 6.5x55 might be the best rifle Barret makes!

PS, is it snowing at your end of the state? 12*F here and coming down sideways... spring, sheesh.

Completely agree on the 6.5x55. The Fieldcraft 6.5x55 for sale recently in the classifieds was very tempting.

Very similar temperature and conditions here....it's been a long winter!

Have you worked much with the suppressed SA Fieldcraft? Own one?

A walnut stocked 6.5 Creedmoor Fieldcraft with an SHV 3-10 will be just over 7.25 with a sling. Just might cover my bases real well.

I own an 18" Fieldcraft, in 308.

With a Silencerco Omega suppressor and cover, SWFA 3-9, Talley LWs, four rounds loaded with 155 Scenars in the magazine, and a nylon strap sling, it goes around 7 5/8 lbs (would need to check my notes for a precise weight). It needs a fairly heavy scope to balance well - I think with a lighter Leupold it would be too front heavy. I could see the LOP of the stock as being an issue for some shorter folks, but a 13 3/4" length of pull works really well for me.

I really like the rifle setup. Shoots well, and doesn't kick much or make much noise. I purchased it around the first of the year, so haven't had a chance to really wring it out or try any other loads...the weather has been too miserable to shoot very much!

Regardless of looks, the Tikka and the Savage will be the most accurate out of the box. Bergara will be close. Remember Remington is in bankruptcy and has been before, at some point down the road they will cease to exist because no one will bail them out. As far as caliber the 7-08 would be a very good choice if something more historical is wanted then the 7x57 is a super idea. All things being equal an extra 100 fps +/- can be gained with handloads, especially if you go with the 7x57 AI, Ackley Improved. I know the old standbys are often over looked such as the 30-06,308 and 270(not a fan of the 270) but are hard to beat and time has proven so!!! Best of Luck with what ever choice is made.

Sweet... and in the "right" cartridge

I think you're right, the LA Fieldcraft's are tailor made for a heavy 19oz+ type of scope.

Iv'e got a Premier 3-15x50 that's 35 oz's... might be perfect

[quote=DLALLDER0(not a fan of the 270) but are hard to beat and time has proven so!!!.[/quote]

Curious what you don't like about the 270? Long action?

On barrel contour, I never warmed up to a barrel not around .650.......IME thin barrels were tempermental, no pun, but yes, they heat up quick too. I did have an 1885 243 that was very accurate......perhaps the octagon helps, IDK, but never had a bad shooting 243. Regardless if bench accuracy is there, I agree with Brad on weight for an all arounder.

Brad
I was having the same thought about the fieldcraft being a little too light. While I know there is no such thing as too light when carrying a gun, shooting a super light gun is a bit tricky and I think a little bit extra weight would suit him better.

Dlallder
Funny you mention Bergara. The Bergara mountain rifle, with its number 2 barrel and 6.2 lbs. is the leading candidate: although we have not yet found a dealer with one in stock to look at.

Curious what you don't like about the 270? Long action?

On barrel contour, I never warmed up to a barrel not around .650.......IME thin barrels were tempermental, no pun, but yes, they heat up quick too. I did have an 1885 243 that was very accurate......perhaps the octagon helps, IDK, but never had a bad shooting 243. Regardless if bench accuracy is there, I agree with Brad on weight for an all arounder.


[/quote]

Despite being much maligned, I have yet to shoot a CLR that wouldn't shoot MOA or better once the barreled action had been bedded in the factory injection molded stock. The light weight of the CLR in 270 that I carried on high country (low Oxygen) hunts is much appreciated this sexagenarian! Too bad that Colt didn't commit to the CLR line enough for them to catch on and justify the production of a short action variant.

Everybody is talking about weight, but I think that stock ergs and the overall balance of the package are more important attributes than weight alone.

This makes perfect sense in today’s “age of powder and bullets.” We get all the power and penetration we need out of much more sensible cartridges.

I'm a backpacker/mountain hunter mostly, and have three Kimber MT's... they're great for that role, but when it comes to the shot I always wish they had more barrel weight (and overall weight). In fact, I'm going to rebarrel one or two of them to a heavier contour. I've been at this stuff for a while and have settled on the spec's I gave - 7.25 - 7.50 lb''s "all-up" with a barrel of no less than .6" - as the best compromise between shoot-ability and portability. Of course it goes without saying the balance and feel of that rifle must be "right" too. Not saying that's the gospel, just my own hard-won preference.

While I agree that thin barrels can be temperamental, & IMHO, usually shoot most consistently being bedded, when was the last time that you fired a gun in a big game hunting scenario with enough rounds & fast enough to heat it up enough to have an real effect? Assuming it was ever good it the 1st place.

Here's a target shot with a Rem 700 Ti 7-08 (pretty thin barrel, around .510 IIRC) that has 9 shots with one bullet & 3 different powders during testing; the action & barrel are correctly bedded, the 9 shots were fired consecutively, single loaded, over a period of maybe 2.5 - 3 minutes at around 65 F.

8 of the 9 shots are in one big hole; I dropped the 9th shot out of the group.

And I have another barrel, same contour, on a 280, that performs equally...........so thin barrels can & will shoot, & heat from firing while hunting is just simply not a issue.................if the gun is good in the 1st place. Not all are.

MM

Generally, I think that's a good place to be but lighter barrels can & do work, although as you point out, the balance is usually not quite as good as with a slightly heavier barrel.

The gun in my stable that absolutely embodies that is a Rem 700 KS rifle..........I've left the barrel at the factory 24" but it would be absolutely perfect if I cut it to 22". I think that barrel is around .580-.600" or thereabouts.

Lighter barrels are just a little harder to shoot off-hand but at any kind of range beyond 100 yards or so, I want some kind of rest anyway, so to some degree, it's a little bit of a moot point.

As with much of the things discussed here in what has turned out to be a good thread, it just really all boils down to personal preference & doing it enough different ways to sort out what really works best for you.

MM

I’ve shot an untold number of groups at the bench with .55” barrels like the one’s you’ve posted above, including with the svelt Kimber MT’s. But that’s a different type of shooting from what is found in the field, under pressure and exertion. That’s where more barrel and rifle weight are a genuine plus. Having said that, I don’t care to lug around 8.75lb rifles anymore, hence the 7.5lb compromise. My backpack rifles will continue to be sub 7lbs, but my general purpose rifles will be north of 7lbs with no.2-type barrels.

MM, nice shooting. My first experience was in the late 80s, a 700 MR, bad crown that Rem butchered out the door, had to fix that, then lap the lugs, and glass bed the recoil lug and tang. After all that, it shot nickel sized groups for 3 with 150 Bt's, did not like 130s, something later 270s proved to be true as well. A joy to carry, not bad balance and weight with a then 6x. But, it went down the road, later M7s never shot to my standards. As Brad points out, they are nice to carry, but IME, I like more weight for steadying. Out west in open country, over a backpack, on sticks or bipod, etc. you can get steady. For how I have hunted, it's not always possible to get a good rest, so more weight helped.

Jeff, I p/u 2 CLRs unfired a few years back, in 7RM. Trigger untouched was atrocious, but the action seemed well made. Heard mixed reviews on the barrel quality, but most owners have done well with them. The balance and stock fit was surprisingly well with it's IIRC 24" barrel. Not a fan on a 7RM, especially in a real light rifle, so both sold. Had they been in 260 or 7/08, I would have kept them. Too bad Colt did not make SA models. They are not a bad platform and I'd trust their action quality more than a 700. Perhaps their bolt design/attachment was better. Yes, had a 700 fail on me.....

On weight, the rifle that 700 bolt failed, started out as a first production SS MR in 270, mid 90 production, or early 90. Built a 338-06 that weighed 8.0 even sans scope. Ordered a .700 muzzle, but it came out .73 by Hart. Then the stocks were a solid Hard rubber IIRC, I floated it, and it shot 1/2 MOA at 200 yds all day. Yet in the mountains, it was just too heavy up and down terrain with it's 1.5-6x B&L - granted not a light scope.

To me, a Tikka sporter with reasonable scope gets real close to a good weight

Now the best light barrel I shot OEM, was a #1 A Ruger, in 243. 3/8" for 3 out the box, with a 2.5-8x, but it was slated for a 6BR project with varmint bbl to 26", and it shot sub 1/2" - at 330 yds thanks to Pac-Nor, full glass bedding, and Kepplinger, and a 4-16x40 ao elite. That OEM 243 barrel was a good barrel, and thin at the muzzle as I recall. Thin muzzles go best with small bores...stiffer, IMHO.

MM, is that rifle full length bedded in the factory Ti stock?

No, it's not full length bedded, just bedded with a neutral pressure pad just back from the end of the forearm.

The gun was a mess when I first got it (new from the factory, one of the last ones produced) as there was a lot of clearance below the action, such that when the BA was set in the stock, the barrel rested on the tip of the fore-end & the tang rested on the stock.

As such, when the action was tightened down, there was an lot of excessive deflection of the barrel & stressing of the action. I don't think I've seen one quite as bad before or since.

So, I stress free bedded the action, with the barrel floated & shot it that way as well as with a neutral pressure pad & it shot considerably better with the pressure pad, so I added the neutral pad & it's been very good since.

I have a Rem 700 MR barrelled action in a Ti stock & bedded the same way & it shoots about as well also.

MM

Thanks MM

I also have a first gen Ti in 7mm-08. It had the forward barrel channel relieved and brass shim stock installed between the barrel and the barrel channel about 2” from the tip. I got it this way. I haven’t taken the time to really sort it out, as it seemed to shoot well if I never let it get hot. It’s only a matter of time before I won’t be able to leave well enough alone...

Thanks for the information, will certainly take it all into consideration.

The rifle and cartridge is set already. If I have to play with more bullets, I will certainly do that. For the immediate intended purpose, ricochet will not be an issue. The shooting angle will be steep downward, with the ground as a backstop.

Lehigh defense 122gr 0.264 caliber bullets are too long to stabilize at subsonic velocities per Berger twist rate calculator.

Reading all these options gave me a headache and made me glad to have been so ignorant as to buy a pre 64 Model 70 Featherweight .308 as my first center fire rifle.
Now it seems a miracle that I was ever able to kill anything with it over the past 50 years.
Why just last weekend, shooting off hand, I shot two feral hogs in the head and one running in the shoulder (right where I aimed) with it; imagine how many I could have shot with a new whiz bang rifle in another caliber?

Wow.

You've been playing with one cartridge for 50 years?

And a 308 to boot?

Nice Rifle ya got there.

I’ve also got a pair of those bubba see thrus in a drawer.


Jerry

First: Great group !!

Second: this is a generalization - not directed toward 65.

I agree with your inference per thin barrels & hunting.
I don’t think most of us shoot enuff rounds -fast enuff- WHEN hunting for heat to become an issue.

UITerriblyM, I have only shot 3 times at one deer which was running SINCE 1972. BTW I killed him on the 3rd shot. IMO that’s unusual.

Jerry

I bought the CLR in 7mm RM because it was cheap and I thought that it might be a good place to start a 257 ROY build. I have thought about rebarreling a couple of spare 30-06 CLRs in 22 Newton, .224" not .228", and 256 Newton, maybe their numbers will come up in 2018.

Regarding barrel quality, several years ago, 2011 IIRC, I spoke to Mr. Forbes at length about the CLRs and he told me that he had insisted that Colt would maintain ULA level quality in the barrels, bolts, and receivers.

As I have posted previously, I think that a good used CLR in 270 or 30-06 is a better value than a new comparable bolt action rifle from Rem, Rug, Sav, etc.

My BIL asked me several years ago what rifle he should get for deer hunting as a Christmas present for his grown son. He had been to the Cabelas in his area (we all live in Missouri) and they had recommended a 30-06.The dad was not a hunter, and his son had never fired a centerfire rifle of any type.

I told him 7-08 all the way. His dad found a Remington SPS in 7-08 for about $500, and my nephew subsequently brought his new rifle over to our place to get it sighted in and learn how to shoot it. I had loaded up some 120 gr NBTs for him, then mounted a Burris FFII I had sitting around on his rifle and after 3 shots to get his scope sighted in - he shot a 3 shot group all touching in the black center diamond of the target at 100 yds. He did all the shooting under my direction with a good rest. He thought it was pretty cool, and so did I.

it isn't like there aren't high BC bullet options for the 7-08. Heck a 140 gr NAB or NBT in a 7mm will hang with a 143 ELDX in a 6.5 out to 500. And you can go 150 ELDX as Pharm has the 7-08 hangs for further than that.

Whelenaway - I did play with it for about one year:

Floated the barrel, Arkansas stone on the sear, stock length adjustment and recoil pad, Magnaported to reduce muzzle jump and experimenting with various loads to minimize group size. My best hand loading efforts resulted in a 5 shot 5/8 inch group(same as Remington 150 grain ammo) and so I gave in to the advice of multiple folk and - "that is a hunting rifle, so stop playing with it and go hunting.". The see through mount and Leupold M8 4x scope have not been touched (other than occasional use as a carry handle) for decades.

It has fired Hornady Light Magnum 150 and 165 grain ammo since Hornady made it available. Scope is set so that it has a line- of- sight hold out to 250 yards and a holdover of 8 inches at 300.
Though I have other rifles, for deer, elk, and hogs, it is my choice when something has to be killed. The current 3 year old box of Superperformance 165 grain ammo, has taken a cow elk, a coyote, Hogzilla, 3 boars, and there are 12 rounds left ( I shot the coyote and one hog off hand a second time to put them down and shut them up).
It is a big game hunting rifle and used only for that purpose.

Jwall - thanks, I kinda like it too.

The 122 grain isn't the Subsonic version, so you're not missing much by not being able to stabilize that particular bullet. They also make a lighter bullet, but there again, the minimum expansion velocity is well over the speed of sound.

You might look at something like a 95 grain Vmax in order to get subsonic expansion, otherwise you might have to go with a slightly unstable bullet and rely on it tumbling within the animal, which is a poor way to go about things.

The subsonic world is a whole different ballgame.

Me too!
I might 'start myself' on one anyway-just for 'educational' purposes.

It only shoots so well because of those nifty scope mounts.

I was looking at the varmint bullets. I though an SST would be a good choice, but numbers don't mesh. I will try the IL's and be aware of ricochet issues. Stability is paramount as I do not want to trash a suppressor. The whole purpose is quiet, if it doesn't work, I will just hunt with suppressed standard loads. I have a couple spots that can be noise sensitive, hence subsonic. But they are both very controlled safe spots with a steep downward shot angle, directed away from urbanization.

What would you think of grinding the exposed lead tip off and drilling a hollow point in the IL?

It wouldn't be my recommendation.